On Jan. 11, DDN editorial workers will receive their 2008 pay raises and they will not be pretty. While the company remains stable and profitable, it has chosen not to reward the hardworking people that produce the content that make its print and online products sellable and make this company valuable.
We expect everyone will soon be told their raises by their bosses. When you receive your raise, consider that the raise data provided by the company to the Guild demonstrates these three fallacies:
–Raises frequently are not connected to the quality of an individual’s work performance.
–There is no dire financial pressure forcing the company to treat most editorial workers unfairly when it comes to pay raises.
–Redlining is a vindictive process through which the company picks and chooses to punish some of our members without regard to their own rationale for the purpose of redlining.
Overall, the raise pool for the editorial department was 2.01 percent. That includes redlining bonuses in lieu of base pay raises. Without the bonuses added in, the base wage average raise for the department was 1.77 percent.
Here are some facts and figures from the raise data provided by the company:
–Highest percentage raise overall: 4.71
–Lowest percentage raise of those not redlined: 0.50
–Top 10 raises went to: 6 copy editors/arists, 3 online workers, 1 photographer
–Bottom 10 raises of those not redlined went to: 8 reporters/editorial writers, 1 copy editor/artist, 1 photographer
33 base pay raises over 2.0
39 base pay raises at 2.0
59 base pay raises under 2.0
–The top raises by category were:
Copy editor/artist: 4.11
Reporter/editorial writer: 3.75
–The worst raises by category were:
Copy editor/artist: 0
Reporter/editorial writer: 0
–There were 11 redlined editorial workers this year, up from 7 last year. Those redlined included:
10 people redlined with no base raise
1 person partially redlined with some base raise
–Of the 11 people who were redlined, only five were among the top 10 wage earners in the bargaining unit.
–Three of the top 10 highest editorial wage earners received base pay raises of 2 percent or better
–Only one of the bottom 10 lowest editorial wage earners received a raise of better than 2 percent
Questions to consider:
–After 3 percent raises in editorial for nearly all of the last decade, why were raises so much lower in 2007 even though the company’s financial position is not significantly changed?
–We have already seen concrete examples of people who received good performance reviews but got low raises. How does this make sense with the company’s supposed move toward a “high performance culture?”
–If the company needs to redline good performers and cap their pay to control costs, why aren’t the redlined workers all among the highest paid editorial workers? Why does the company pick and choose to punish only certain high wage earners?
–Why isn’t the money saved by redlining people at the high end of the wage scale used to bring up the lowest salaries at the bottom of the scale?